IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ssa/lemwps/2021-40.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Innovation pattern heterogeneity: A data-driven retrieval of the firms' approaches to innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Marco Capasso
  • Marina Rybalka

Abstract

Innovation is one of the usual suspects in defining differences in performance among firms, according to a strong and diverse theoretical framework. Understanding the diversity that exists within the population of innovative firms is essential to elaborate appropriate innovation policies. Our study explores the diversity of innovation patterns among Norwegian firms included in the 2018 Community innovation survey (CIS2018). By applying factor analysis on a wide array of survey variables and on a large sample of firms, we identify eleven typical approaches to innovation, which recurrently connect innovation inputs and outputs at firm level. A main outcome of our study is a renewed fine-grained view on innovation as a multifaceted concept.

Suggested Citation

  • Marco Capasso & Marina Rybalka, 2021. "Innovation pattern heterogeneity: A data-driven retrieval of the firms' approaches to innovation," LEM Papers Series 2021/40, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    • Handle: RePEc:ssa:lemwps:2021/40
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.lem.sssup.it/WPLem/files/2021-40.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. R. E. Caves & M. E. Porter, 1977. "From Entry Barriers to Mobility Barriers: Conjectural Decisions and Contrived Deterrence to New Competition," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 91(2), pages 241-261.
    2. Francesco Bogliacino & Mario Pianta, 2016. "The Pavitt Taxonomy, revisited: patterns of innovation in manufacturing and services," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 33(2), pages 153-180, August.
    3. Klette, Tor Jakob & Griliches, Zvi, 2000. "Empirical Patterns of Firm Growth and R&D Investment: A Quality Ladder Model Interpretation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(463), pages 363-387, April.
    4. Meindert Flikkema & Ard-Pieter De Man & Carolina Castaldi, 2014. "Are Trademark Counts a Valid Indicator of Innovation? Results of an In-Depth Study of New Benelux Trademarks Filed by SMEs," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(4), pages 310-331, May.
    5. Castellacci, Fulvio, 2008. "Technological paradigms, regimes and trajectories: Manufacturing and service industries in a new taxonomy of sectoral patterns of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6-7), pages 978-994, July.
    6. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    7. Consoli, Davide & Rentocchini, Francesco, 2015. "A taxonomy of multi-industry labour force skills," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 1116-1132.
    8. Alessandro Baroncelli & Matteo Landoni, 2017. "Exploring differences in university support practices and the effects on spin-off companies in Boston," International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 21(4/5), pages 366-394.
    9. Pakes, Ariel & Ericson, Richard, 1998. "Empirical Implications of Alternative Models of Firm Dynamics," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 79(1), pages 1-45, March.
    10. Dosi, G. & Piva, M. & Virgillito, M.E. & Vivarelli, M., 2021. "Embodied and disembodied technological change: The sectoral patterns of job-creation and job-destruction," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    11. Lutz Schneider & Jutta Gunther & Bianca Brandenburg, 2010. "Innovation and skills from a sectoral perspective: a linked employer-employee analysis," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(2), pages 185-202.
    12. Ascani, Andrea & Balland, Pierre-Alexandre & Morrison, Andrea, 2020. "Heterogeneous foreign direct investment and local innovation in Italian Provinces," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 388-401.
    13. Nelson, Richard R. & Winter, Sidney G., 1993. "In search of useful theory of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 108-108, April.
    14. Leiponen, Aija & Drejer, Ina, 2007. "What exactly are technological regimes?: Intra-industry heterogeneity in the organization of innovation activities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 1221-1238, October.
    15. de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & Marsili, Orietta, 2006. "The fruit flies of innovations: A taxonomy of innovative small firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 213-229, March.
    16. Daniele Archibugi, 2001. "Pavitt'S Taxonomy Sixteen Years On: A Review Article," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(5), pages 415-425.
    17. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Massimo Colombo & Massimiliano Guerini & Cristina Rossi-Lamastra, 2013. "University specialization and new firm creation across industries," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 837-863, December.
    18. Alex Coad & Nanditha Mathew & Emanuele Pugliese, 2020. "What’s good for the goose ain’t good for the gander: heterogeneous innovation capabilities and the performance effects of R&D," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 29(3), pages 621-644.
    19. Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
    20. Colombo, Massimo G. & Foss, Nicolai J. & Lyngsie, Jacob & Rossi Lamastra, Cristina, 2021. "What drives the delegation of innovation decisions? The roles of firm innovation strategy and the nature of external knowledge," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    21. Alex Coad & Nanditha Mathew & Emanuele Pugliese, 2017. "What's good for the goose ain't good for the gander: cock-eyed counterfactuals and the performance effects of R&D," LEM Papers Series 2017/21, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    22. Claudio Di Berardino & Gianni Onesti, 2021. "Explaining deindustrialisation from a vertical perspective: industrial linkages, producer services, and international trade," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(7), pages 685-706, October.
    23. Mikko Paananen, 2012. "I'll Find it Where I Can: Exploring the Role of Resource and Financial Constraints in Search Behaviour among Innovators," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(1), pages 63-84, January.
    24. Marco Capasso & Elena Cefis & Koen Frenken, 2014. "On the existence of persistently outperforming firms," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 23(4), pages 997-1036.
    25. Miguel Flores & Sandra Medellín & Amado Villarreal, 2018. "Global Markets and the Role of Geographical Proximity in Mexico's Employment Growth," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(3), pages 548-568, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chang, Yuan-Chieh & Chen, Min-Nan, 2016. "Service regime and innovation clusters: An empirical study from service firms in Taiwan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1845-1857.
    2. repec:got:cegedp:102 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Alp Eren Yurtseven & Mehmet Teoman Pamukçu, 2022. "Innovation patterns in firms and intra-industry heterogeneity empirical evidence from Turkey," Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 645-679, September.
    4. Peneder, Michael, 2010. "Technological regimes and the variety of innovation behaviour: Creating integrated taxonomies of firms and sectors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 323-334, April.
    5. Alessandro Nuvolari & Emanuele Russo, 2019. "Technical progress and structural change: a long-term view," LEM Papers Series 2019/17, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    6. Gehringer, Agnieszka, 2010. "Pecuniary knowledge externalities in a new taxonomy: Knowledge interactions in a vertically integrated system," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 102, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    7. Marco Capasso & Tania Treibich & Bart Verspagen, 2015. "The medium-term effect of R&D on firm growth," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 39-62, June.
    8. de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & Marsili, Orietta, 2006. "The fruit flies of innovations: A taxonomy of innovative small firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 213-229, March.
    9. Trigo, Alexandre & Vence, Xavier, 2012. "Scope and patterns of innovation cooperation in Spanish service enterprises," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 602-613.
    10. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Massimo Colombo & Massimiliano Guerini & Cristina Rossi-Lamastra, 2013. "University specialization and new firm creation across industries," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 837-863, December.
    11. Alessandra Colombelli & Jackie Krafft & Marco Vivarelli, 2016. "To be born is not enough: the key role of innovative start-ups," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 277-291, August.
    12. Holger Graf, 2013. "Inventor Networks in Emerging Key Technologies: Information Technology vs. Semiconductors," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Guido Buenstorf & Uwe Cantner & Horst Hanusch & Michael Hutter & Hans-Walter Lorenz & Fritz Rahmeyer (ed.), The Two Sides of Innovation, edition 127, pages 55-76, Springer.
    13. Fulvio Castellacci, 2008. "Innovation in Norway in a European Perspective," Nordic Journal of Political Economy, Nordic Journal of Political Economy, vol. 34, pages 1-1.
    14. Cresti, Lorenzo & Dosi, Giovanni & Fagiolo, Giorgio, 2023. "Technological interdependencies and employment changes in European industries," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 41-57.
    15. Heredia Pérez, Jorge A. & Kunc, Martin H. & Durst, Susanne & Flores, Alejandro & Geldes, Cristian, 2018. "Impact of competition from unregistered firms on R&D investment by industrial sectors in emerging economies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 179-189.
    16. Castellacci, Fulvio, 2008. "Technological paradigms, regimes and trajectories: Manufacturing and service industries in a new taxonomy of sectoral patterns of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6-7), pages 978-994, July.
    17. Consoli, Davide & Rentocchini, Francesco, 2015. "A taxonomy of multi-industry labour force skills," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 1116-1132.
    18. Arundel, Anthony & Casali, Luca & Hollanders, Hugo, 2015. "How European public sector agencies innovate: The use of bottom-up, policy-dependent and knowledge-scanning innovation methods," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(7), pages 1271-1282.
    19. Montresor, Sandro & Vezzani, Antonio, 2015. "The production function of top R&D investors: Accounting for size and sector heterogeneity with quantile estimations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 381-393.
    20. Fulvio Castellacci, 2007. "Technological regimes and sectoral differences in productivity growth ," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(6), pages 1105-1145, December.
    21. Jagoda Kaszowska-Mojsa, 2021. "Innovation Strategies of Polish Manufacturing Companies through the Business Cycle," Ekonomista, Polskie Towarzystwo Ekonomiczne, issue 2, pages 39-65.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Technological change; Innovation survey; Factor analysis; Business strategies; Intra-industry heterogeneity.;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ssa:lemwps:2021/40. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/labssit.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.